naeylonsidhe

mymovinman

mrwednesday wrote:This should be rejected swiftly by Monday because it is clearly against the rules just as much as the rejections that have already been handed down.

Beyond that at least try to show some artistic integrity. Bill Watterson was fiercely opposed to the commercialization of his characters which is why he never licensed the IP. It's insulting that so many so called artists spit on his wishes especially since there is absolutely no parody whatsoever in this design. Bad form.

dreamlessdays86

At risk of echoing the comment before mine, I just want to say I love your designs Ramyb. While this design won't get a +1 from me, you have two others this week that will. You offer a great variety of designs in almost every derby and I find myself surprised when I look at some designs and see they're from you. Keep up the great work. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that I'll be able to get the "GPS Fail" this upcoming weekend.

graffd02

*ahem* Sorry, I'm better now. Seriously, this shirt rocks so hard that I don't even care that I look terrible in cream, I will buy it and wear it anyways. (But if you feel like doing a version in, say, blue, I won't tell you not to.)

scubastove

Ramyb's Oz shirt was rejected, not due to the "map" itself but for the content around it (i.e. the characters). There was another Zelda shirt rejected due to the rules not allowing 'fictional worlds you didn't create'.

Absolutely no animosity towards the artist, I think this is a great design and it made me laugh. I'm just concerned over why the rejectionator is banning multiple shirts for (somewhat) subtle pop culture references, but this design has made it to the fog for 2 days now. Navi is an icon of the Zelda series, and it is obvious that the other character is Link as well. But a yellow brick road, with a girl and a dog facing AWAY from the viewers POV is rejected just because of the setting of the design? Again, I reiterate no disrespect toward this artist, I'm just WTFing at the rejections.

ramyb

bluejester wrote:When I share my opinion here on why I feel like this should get the axe by the rejectionator, I want all of you to know that even if I get frustrated at your opinions, I remember that there is a living, thinking person on the other end of the converstaion. I don't mean to sound condescending or rude with my opinion here, and humbly apologize if typed words come across with an inflection that I do not intend. To that end, here goes my thoughts on why this design should be rejected:

Here is the break down in "Phantom Tollbooth" type logic:

If you are not somewhere, then surely you must be someplace else. If you are someplace else, what would you call that someplace else?

To that end;

Where does this shirt design imply that the someplace else

or

Suppose I've never seen this shirt design and I walk up to you and see the shirt. Where do you suppose I will think that the "Dorothy Gale look-a-like and her little dog too" are standing? Not what is that a map of, that's the wrong question. The right question is where are they standing.

Yes, it's easy to fall into the trap of rude snarkiness and say "not Kansas;" however I am asking a genuine question here.

Now, it's true the map is of the good ol' U.S.A. and the rules say "No maps of fictional worlds you didn't create." America is real, and thank God for that because it's where I keep all my stuff.

However, the rules also say in the example "Yes, make up your own continent." Again, where am I suppossed to think that the little girl-- who happens to look like Dorothy--is standing? For the gag to work, I have to infer that she is in OZ. Not something that Ramyb created.

I think what frustrates me about this design not having been rejected is the fact that it seems like it has gotten by because of this part of the rules:
"No, don't give us a map of Narnia or Oz or whatever." Technically, the map displayed is of U.S.A. So no, technically Ramyb didn't make up the map of America. But Dorothy has to be standing in OZ to make the gag work.

In the end, the last rule for this particular derby is a little too muddled. Is it that no implication of previously established fictional worlds are allowed, or is it okay as long as you don't actually have a map of the place?

Which aspect of the final derby rule takes precedent? No fictional worlds, or No Maps of fictional worlds?

The joke is that she ISN'T in Oz- she is in an absolutely ordinary place- The original version of the design even showed on the map where she was, which was in Missouri. I even got rid of the yellow brick road to take out any implication of Oz.

kylemittskus

ramyb wrote:The joke is that she ISN'T in Oz- she is in an absolutely ordinary place- The original version of the design even showed on the map where she was, which was in Missouri. I even got rid of the yellow brick road to take out any implication of Oz.

So the joke is Dorothy isn't in Oz and she isn't in Kansas. So then, why is she Dorothy?

If the aforementioned is true, your shirt makes zero sense. It does make sense if one is to assume she is Dorothy (shoes, dog, outfit). Assuming that, then the logical assumption is that she's not in Kansas; ergo, she's in Oz. This conclusion comes from the quote in the movie when she's in Oz (!)] saying to herself that she's no longer in Kansas.

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

Oxyminoan

j5

kylemittskus wrote:So the joke is Dorothy isn't in Oz and she isn't in Kansas. So then, why is she Dorothy?

If the aforementioned is true, your shirt makes zero sense. It does make sense if one is to assume she is Dorothy (shoes, dog, outfit). Assuming that, then the logical assumption is that she's not in Kansas; ergo, she's in Oz. This conclusion comes from the quote in the movie when she's in Oz (!)] saying to herself that she's no longer in Kansas.

Isn't that the joke? Taking the fantastic and making it mundane? She isn't in Kansas, or OZ, but someplace else, some totally mundane location. The original showed her in MO, which was the point of the joke.

Woot.com is operated by Woot Services LLC.
Products on Woot.com are sold by Woot, Inc., other than items on Wine.Woot which are sold by the seller specified on the product detail page.
Product narratives are for entertainment purposes and frequently employ
literary point of view;
the narratives do not express Woot's editorial opinion.
Aside from literary abuse, your use of this site also subjects you to Woot's
terms of use
and
privacy policy.
Woot may designate a user comment as a Quality Post, but that doesn't mean we agree with or guarantee anything said or linked to in that post.